UFN 113 - Ponzinibbio vs Nelson - Scotland

Status
Not open for further replies.
Three bets that I like that have been discussed much and why I like them.


Jack Marshman vs. Ryan Janes

Jack Marshman is an absolute throwback. The British brawler has gained a mass of fanatics who love his "just bleed" style. Indeed, the man is never in a boring fight and is willing to lay it all on the line each time out. While he is chaotic at times, he remains technically proficient more often than not with the sweet science being his base. Jack Marshmann works behind a stiff jab and the confidence of his chin to enter the pocket and rip off tight hooks with both hands. Marshmann has tremendous punching power as demonstrated by his resume. Specifically he's picked up 13 of his 21 wins via knockout. One those TKO victories came against the highly touted Magnus Cedenblad whom Marshmann slept in the second round.

Ryan Janes is is about as vanilla a fighter as it gets in modern mixed martial arts. Basically he is able to have a job fighting for a living based on solid fundamentals and outstanding cardio. His striking is mediocre at best and downright feckless and pitiable at worst. While he does have a stiff job and can't string to gather meaningful offense, he stands far too upright and leaves his chin out there to get clipped in every performance. His best asset is his grappling game as he is a BJJ black belt. However, the Canuck doesn't possess the wrestling chops to bring his opponent to the mat where he can utilize his chief skill set. Nevertheless, Janes has been able to ply his trade consistently on the regional circuit where he has racked up 7 of his 9 victories by submission. Additionally, all but one them have been via his rear naked choke. .

Quite simply, Janes is not UFC material. There are very few fighters at this level that he can best and he is fortunate enough to fight in a division that is shallow as a thimble full of water once you get outside of the top 15. As mentioned earlier, he gets hit far too easily and Marshmann possesses monstrous power. Expect Janes to ultimately get hit with a shot that looks like it was thrown down like a lightning bolt cast by Zeus himself.

Pick: Jack Marshman by TKO/KO

I got Marshmann via TKO at -120 – many got him at + money and I was even late on the trigger here – but I believe he still holds value all the way up to -200 in this method.as I believe that he starches the Canadian ITD around 80% of the time.

Bet: Jack Marshman via TKO at -148 risking 3.28 units


Leslie Smith (9-7-1) vs. Amanda Lemos (6-0-1)


Stepping in on short notice for Muay-Thai striker Lina Landsberg is UFC newcomer Amanda Lemos. The debutante will be making her Bantamweight appearance against the ultimate blood-and guts-warrior Leslie Smith.

While her 9-6 record is substandard, it is a bit miss leading as Smith has been a take on all comers type of fighter often competing above her natural weight class and repeatedly excepting bouts on short notice. Nevertheless, Smith it's a veteran UFC fighter with a well-rounded skill set. A talented striker who is consistently on her front foot, Smith often breaks her opponents through sheer will and aggression. Marching forward like a virtual zombie she is able to force a brawl out of finesse strikers. Still yeah, her skill set is limited and a shoe lax in speed, quickness and athleticism.

Smith is coming off a victory to continue her trend of alternating wins and losses over her last six contests.

Lemos is a formidable striker in her own right possessing a bit more pop in her punches then Smith. Five of the freshman's fighters outings were ended early with the knockout. The biggest problem with Lemos however is that she has yet to face even a hint of quality opposition thus Certainly, Smith will be her toughest opponent to date in her abbreviated MMA tenure.

Stylistically, neither fighter is a formidable grappling specialist although if it were to go to the mat I believe the advantage goes to Smith. With decent takedowns, Smith is heavy on top and does possess some vicious ground and pound. Additionally, Smith is knowledgeable in procuring and defending submissions. The same cannot be said for Lemos who has shown no history of ground fighting in six fight career nor is she credentialed outside of it.

Ultimately this should be a back-and-forth barnburner of a contest where both ladies take each other to the woodshed for 15 minutes. We know for a fact that Smith has the durability to go the full three. Though generally not interested in the grappling arts, we may see a crafty Smith lean on her experience and hit some reactive takedowns to seal close rounds. It's quite possible that in one of these takedowns she is able to snatch a submission. With a submission prop as high as +1000 I believe it's worth a flier for value and even more so for action.

Granted, Smith has never notched a submission victory in her 15 fight professional career. However, she has competed almost exclusively against high-level opposition and this will be her lowest level opponent in years. What's more, she trains out of the Cesar Gracie Jiu-Jitsu camp and is a BJJ Purple belt under the titular Gracie. What's more, let's not forget that up until a week ago UFC veteran Tecia Torres had never secured ANY type of finish in NINE appearances. Now she has ZERO KOs, ONE Submission, EIGHT Decisions and millions of busted parlays!

Putting money on either one of these women is a recipe for disaster.

Prediction Smith via split decision victory


Brett Johns (13-0) vs. Albert Morales (7-1-1)

Former Cage Warriors Fighting Championship and Titan Fighting Championships Bantamweight Champion Will make his 14th professional MMA appearance tomorrow afternoon as he aims to remain undefeated. At 13-0, four 135 pounds Welchman was successful in his UFC debut after picking up multiple victories all the regional circuit against extremely high level of position outside of a premier promotion. Specifically, Johns has defeated the highly talented TUF veteranr Anthony Gutierrez along with former UFC competitor Waiel Watson prior to entering the octagon. The young 25-year-old is extremely well rounded with a serviceable striking game and a formidable grappling attack. The Welsh fighter is a Black belt in Judo and a Purple belt in BJJ. That strong Judo base and quick hips allow him to dictate where the flight takes place. Johns also has a credentialed background in Muay Thai.

Taking a fight on just two weeks notice is California's Albert Morales. An aggressive striker, Morales is perpetually on his front foot stalking his adversary looking for a firefight. With his fan friendly style, Morales will fire off a bevy of heavy punching combos as brutal low leg kicks. The problem for Morales is that his run-and-gun offense is both a blessing and a curse. While he is capable of getting his opponent out of there fast, he also leaves himself vulnerable to counters. This is both true in relation striking and takedowns as he often finds himself out of position. This is not preferable against a wrestler the caliber of Johns.

Honestly, if it weren't for the two weeks notice, I would probably put a flier on Morales as I believe that this number has gone to inflated. That said, Morales is coming in without having even a modicum of a respectable training camp and across Atlantic flight is it going to help the situation.

That said, one bet that I do believe holds value in this matchup is the under 2.5 rounds prop. I believe that if Morales is to beat Johns, he's going to have to take him out before the final horn. I also think he realizes this. As such, I expect Morales to come out extra aggressive trying to get Johns out of there early. If this strategy fails to materialize and "The Pikey" is still there after the first frame, I believe that it turns into a one-sided grappling contest. I realize that Morales is a serviceable grappler himself with a BJJ purple belt, but his cardio is unlikely to hold up. Anticipate him running out of steam and then getting choked out shortly thereafter.

Either way, one I think one of these two fighters finds the finish in this situation. With the betting line where it is I have to make a small wager.

Prediction: Brett Johns via second round submission.

Bet under 2.5 at +260 for 1.5u
 
I also think that a good parlay is
Parlay: -110
» Brett Johns -370
» Danny Roberts -200

Believe that Danny Roberts is way too good for Bobby Nash and Brett Johns should have a walk in the park.

At -110 that is a fantastic two team parlay

Please, if you haven't tailed this don't..I think that the johns fight is far closer than I thought..sorry if tailed!
 
People like to chase dogs too much. I saw a chart today, if you were to bet each underdog on each UFC event this year at $100, you would be down -$4,760.00

Finding value in a underdog is one thing, to chase a underdog because his line is high and you think he has a slight chance is a losing game.

nick, that's interesting, where did you find that #..?

it's about picking the right dogs & betting the right amounts when you're confident (and accurate) with your read of their chances > their price

i.e.:

2016, my mma dogs won me 108 units. my mma favorites won me 5 units lol.

i bet on dogs 400 times. i bet on favorites 349 times.

but so far in 2017, i've been on 130 favorites & 204 underdogs... i've won 61 units on favorites and only 13 units on dogs

it should be noted/stressed: these are my personal #'s above, on dogs i picked, favorites i picked, and i bet varying amounts on both types. but 2016 sure as shit should disprove your statement...

it hasn't been the year of the dog this year so far but there's no blanket statement that means anything, IMO.

this is a FACT:

value = price afforded compared to perceived likelihood. that's IT. if anyone argues this sentence, i would shake my head
 
I'd be very interested in seeing this chart, please do share?
nick, that's interesting, where did you find that #..?

it's about picking the right dogs & betting the right amounts when you're confident (and accurate) with your read of their chances > their price

i.e.:

2016, my mma dogs won me 108 units. my mma favorites won me 5 units lol.

i bet on dogs 400 times. i bet on favorites 349 times.

but so far in 2017, i've been on 130 favorites & 204 underdogs... i've won 61 units on favorites and only 13 units on dogs

it should be noted/stressed: these are my personal #'s above, on dogs i picked, favorites i picked, and i bet varying amounts on both types. but 2016 sure as shit should disprove your statement...

it hasn't been the year of the dog this year so far but there's no blanket statement that means anything, IMO.

this is a FACT:

value = price afforded compared to perceived likelihood. that's IT. if anyone argues this sentence, i would shake my head
I would post the chart but I don't know how lol. When I click upload a file it says the file does not match the extension. I can post the link if you want.
 
For this event, all of these have good value:

Felder
JoJo
Morales
Mulheron
Lemos
Nash
 
nick, that's interesting, where did you find that #..?

it's about picking the right dogs & betting the right amounts when you're confident (and accurate) with your read of their chances > their price

i.e.:

2016, my mma dogs won me 108 units. my mma favorites won me 5 units lol.

i bet on dogs 400 times. i bet on favorites 349 times.

but so far in 2017, i've been on 130 favorites & 204 underdogs... i've won 61 units on favorites and only 13 units on dogs

it should be noted/stressed: these are my personal #'s above, on dogs i picked, favorites i picked, and i bet varying amounts on both types. but 2016 sure as shit should disprove your statement...

it hasn't been the year of the dog this year so far but there's no blanket statement that means anything, IMO.

this is a FACT:

value = price afforded compared to perceived likelihood. that's IT. if anyone argues this sentence, i would shake my head


That is right, EZ as just in the last 30 days the average play for me as +270 and they have won me +34 units with the highest wager risked being 3.5 units. And I 56.21 ROI% ...With 20 bets placed. So it's all about picking your spots.
 
UNDERDOG CHART



ShgIQB7.jpg


YcfGGpS.jpg
 
UNDERDOG CHART



ShgIQB7.jpg


YcfGGpS.jpg

hard to read a ton into this. what price are they taking on the dogs? are they taking the fight day reduced juice? if so, that would close that 47 unit gap in a HURRY.

hell, when are they playing the favorites? for example steven ray opened -110 and is now -175 or higher etc, at what point are they counting him as a favorite? etc etc
 
liking ponz-nelson starts rd 3 -142. and i pulled the trigger on ponz +160, too. reason is simple: if story can keep it standing and win 5 rounds vs gunnar, i absolutely think ponz can. i think ponz is flat-out better than story. i won't be surprised WHATSOEVER if gunnie does stun him and sub him, or if he does manage a takedown and a sub, etc.. i'm NOT underestimating gunnie. i just think it's a winnable fight for ponz. if i could've gotten gunnie NSC under -200 and/or gunnie sub +2xx or higher, i would've probably taken them.

pulled trigger on nash +155 and on fight won't go 3 (-175).. feel quite good about it not going 3 rounds, period. gonna do a decently-sized bet on that. would've liked it cheaper but i still like the value.
 
The chart doesn't show much at all honestly. Blindly betting every dog isn't going to be profitable? Well no shit. Blindly betting the favorites is also bringing a really low ROI.

For anyone that has been betting for years has seen this conversation happen all of the time. Not long ago, people were talking about betting underdogs being the key to profit as dogs were hitting heavy. It's never betting dogs vs. favorites as people can be successful with either strategy. You just figure out where you think you have an edge or where you are better at predicting and run with it.
 
lol, i looked at BFO and saw O1.5 at +185 for willis-mulheron.. guess it was a typo or something. it's -132.

anyway, i like it. mulheron can take some punishment. and he dosn't really finish dudes that easily, either. in fact...

mulheron has been O1.5 in 9 of his 12 pro fights.. 7 of his last 8...

i'm aware willis has been U1.5 in his last 4, but i think considerably weaker opposition and the way this is likely to play out is willis looking for td's and mulheron defending them and/or being too tough to stop very easily if he does get taken down
 
lol, i looked at BFO and saw O1.5 at +185 for willis-mulheron.. guess it was a typo or something. it's -132.

anyway, i like it. mulheron can take some punishment. and he dosn't really finish dudes that easily, either. in fact...

mulheron has been O1.5 in 9 of his 12 pro fights.. 7 of his last 8...

i'm aware willis has been U1.5 in his last 4, but i think considerably weaker opposition and the way this is likely to play out is willis looking for td's and mulheron defending them and/or being too tough to stop very easily if he does get taken down

Perfectly agree.
We could also expect Willis to run out of gas around round 2 and Mulheros to dominate the match with his elusiveness and high volume output, i.e. Mulheros DEC (approx +500).
 
Perfectly agree.
We could also expect Willis to run out of gas around round 2 and Mulheros to dominate the match with his elusiveness and high volume output, i.e. Mulheros DEC (approx +500).

just looked at that prop, too, but it's in the +300's on 5d. i snoozed, i losed (hehe)
 
bros, how does parlay betting work with MMA?


I picked 8 winners for UFN 113, and selected a quad multi. There are 70 possible quad multi combinations which I put $1 on ($70 bet total).

Does that mean, if any one of those 70 combinations happens, I win the parlay?

Cheers
 
bros, how does parlay betting work with MMA?


I picked 8 winners for UFN 113, and selected a quad multi. There are 70 possible quad multi combinations which I put $1 on ($70 bet total).

Does that mean, if any one of those 70 combinations happens, I win the parlay?

Cheers

You basically made a bet on every single group of four that can be extracted out of those eight. Each one of those quad has 1$ on it and will make you win or lose according to the four fighters it contains.
For instance, if only four out of your eight fighters will win, only one of the 70 bets will win, giving you 1$*A*B*C*D.

In short:
Yes.
However your winnings will not necessarily be higher than what you paid for it.
 
You basically made a bet on every single group of four that can be extracted out of those eight. Each one of those quad has 1$ on it and will make you win or lose according to the four fighters it contains.
For instance, if only four out of your eight fighters will win, only one of the 70 bets will win, giving you 1$*A*B*C*D.

In short:
Yes.
However your winnings will not necessarily be higher than what you paid for it.
Ohh ok thanks mate, i'm not as smart as I thought I was..damn
 
hard to read a ton into this. what price are they taking on the dogs? are they taking the fight day reduced juice? if so, that would close that 47 unit gap in a HURRY.

hell, when are they playing the favorites? for example steven ray opened -110 and is now -175 or higher etc, at what point are they counting him as a favorite? etc etc
Probably apples and pears, how many times
pick a dog on line release and the odds get better and better.
Defo an interesting chart, the dogs are hittingnless, bookies getting wiser and the game is getting tighter, it's not like the good ol days

I rarely dog hunt, if I think someone can't win then I don't bet them plain and simple, why would I put my money on somone I don't think
wins, capping or no capping they're not getting my money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top